Started By
Message
locked post

Any other Star Trek:TOS fans hate the Abrams stuff?

Posted on 2/15/13 at 8:57 am
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89480 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 8:57 am
I go beyond "not my cup of tea", and I just viscerally hate the movie, the new characters, the whole conversion of Star Trek from a character-based drama to a Michael Bay-esque, all flash, no substance, wooden conversion of the TOS characters, essentially reduced to one-note jokes.

Am I being reactionary? I don't really want to be converted and I know many TOS fans really enjoy it (although I simply cannot understand it in context of, particularly TOS and DS9), but I wanted to throw this out and see if any TOS fans agree with me.

ETA: Without going full Nerd, "TOS" stands for "The Original Series", to distinguish from the subsequent television series and films.
This post was edited on 2/15/13 at 7:08 pm
Posted by ProjectP2294
South St. Louis city
Member since May 2007
70094 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 8:58 am to
I remember someone getting upset when I mentioned that I never watched the old ST movies or TV shows, but really enjoyed the recent movie.
Posted by Patrick O Rly
y u do dis?
Member since Aug 2011
41187 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:02 am to
Can you write out your short hand so I can understand what you're talking about? Not being snarky.
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89480 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:04 am to
quote:

I remember someone getting upset when I mentioned that I never watched the old ST movies or TV shows, but really enjoyed the recent movie.


THAT I can completely understand. Having no connection to the original series' characters, as these bear only a superficial resemblence, I completely get that. What I don't get is this seemingly significant majority of TOS fans who not only like it, but LOVE it. I can't tell if it is peer pressure, the whole, "We're supposed to like it because it is much better done than the TNG movies" or whatever, but I recognize it was a very well made movie, but it is far more Star Wars than Star Trek, which, to be fair, Abrams said all along, as he was a fan of the former and not the latter.

I'm still waiting for a TOS fan to go beyond, "It's targeting a broader audience" which is no reason for me to like it whatsoever. I can't count the f*cks I don't give about to whom it is targeted. I have an attachment to the original series characters and the work done in that series and the excellent, excellent films done with those characters. If I'm not supposed to remember or worry about that, why the f*ck am I watching this movie?
Posted by hashtag
Comfy, AF
Member since Aug 2005
27465 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:05 am to
quote:

I go beyond "not my cup of tea", and I just viscerally hate the movie, the new characters, the whole conversion of Star Trek from a character-based drama to a Michael Bay-esque, all flash, no substance, wooden conversion of the TOS characters, essentially reduced to one-note jokes.
TOS - 79 episodes
TNG - 178 episodes
DSN - 176 episodes
Voyager - 172 episodes
Enterprise - 98 episodes

New Movie - 127 minutes

Yeah, I can't see at all why they didn't include the character development that we've come to expect from the tv shows...
Posted by JawjaTigah
Bizarro World
Member since Sep 2003
22495 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:05 am to
quote:

Can you write out your short hand so I can understand what you're talking about? Not being snarky.
nm
This post was edited on 2/15/13 at 9:07 am
Posted by Hoodoo Man
Sunshine Pumping most days.
Member since Oct 2011
31637 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:06 am to
Are you being reactionary?
Yeah.

That Star Trek movie was very, very good.
And I would hardly call the movie substance-less or the characters wooden.

It's not same; it's modern.
That's not a bad thing.
Posted by Hoodoo Man
Sunshine Pumping most days.
Member since Oct 2011
31637 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:07 am to
quote:

Agreed. Am probably dense, but cannot decipher TOS either. Sorry.


The Original Series?
Posted by ProjectP2294
South St. Louis city
Member since May 2007
70094 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:07 am to
I'm guessing TOS means The Original Series.
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89480 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:08 am to
quote:

Yeah, I can't see at all why they didn't include the character development that we've come to expect from the tv shows...


The relationships don't appear to be intact. Everything has been thrown out in favor of inexplicable action sequences. I understand the limitations of the film medium.

Khan, Search for Spock, The Voyage Home and Undiscovered Country all seemed to stay loyal to the characters, and tell a great story. Even the weaker TOS films, TMP and TFF (even Generations) maintained that connection with the characters and the work that had already been done.
Posted by JawjaTigah
Bizarro World
Member since Sep 2003
22495 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:08 am to
quote:

The Original Series?
It appears to be. And I agree with you - the Abrams movie is new, but it is very good and entertaining. And I was around and loving Star Trek when TOS was not re-runs.

And for those who aren't sure, let's remember - the character development took decades of the crew being together. They weren't immediately the Kirk and Spock and Bones, et al of TOS fame. Like real people, those relationships and characteristics developed over time. This is like the prequel.
This post was edited on 2/15/13 at 9:11 am
Posted by dr smartass phd
RIP 8/19
Member since Sep 2004
20387 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:11 am to
In the immortal words of the Shat

"Get a Life"

What made TOS special, was the cast chemistry.
This post was edited on 2/15/13 at 9:13 am
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89480 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:15 am to
quote:

In the immortal words of the Shat


If the filmmakers do not care about why I was a fan in the first place, why am I supposed to like the movie?

Because it's new? F*cking Transformers is new.

I understand what he was trying to do. Most remakes/reboots, just phone it in. I agree that was not done in this case. However, after watching the Avengers, I would have much preferred to have seen Whedon's take (himself a Star Trek fan, clear from the work in Firefly/Serenity), rather than Abrams, as I have not enjoyed any of his other work.

I admitted I'm in the minority, I said I did not want to be converted. I was tossing this out to see if anyone else felt the same way. I guess this is just a disagreement with no resolution.
This post was edited on 2/15/13 at 9:19 am
Posted by ProjectP2294
South St. Louis city
Member since May 2007
70094 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:15 am to
quote:

This is like the prequel.


Wasn't it set in an alternate universe also?
Posted by LoveThatMoney
Who knows where?
Member since Jan 2008
12268 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:15 am to
quote:

Even the weaker TOS films, TMP and TFF (even Generations) maintained that connection with the characters and the work that had already been done.



Why is that necessary? The Abrams universe (literally) is different than the one created and used in the other movies and shows. I understand your love for characters past - I wanted to vomit at what they did to Deadpool in X-Men Origins - but taken alone, the Abrams movie was pretty damn good. You and I have debated this before, but why are you so against being different? Are you a gay hater, too?

But no seriously, I think you're being reactionary and are unable to move past your love for characters that are barely even base models for the movie. That and your hate for Chris Pine. And explosions (apparently).

ETA: all of which is understandable.
This post was edited on 2/15/13 at 9:19 am
Posted by Fearthehat0307
Dallas, TX
Member since Dec 2007
65256 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:18 am to
quote:

rather than Abram, as I have not enjoyed any of his other work.
you are dead to me
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89480 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:20 am to
quote:

Why is that necessary?


If they're not going to respect what came before, again, I'm serious, why am I watching it then? If it is just in "the key" of Star Trek, or "flavored" with Star Trek, but it throws everything that made me enjoy Star Trek away, why do I even care?

Posted by Fearthehat0307
Dallas, TX
Member since Dec 2007
65256 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:23 am to
quote:

If they're not going to respect what came before, again, I'm serious, why am I watching it then? If it is just in "the key" of Star Trek, or "flavored" with Star Trek, but it throws everything that made me enjoy Star Trek away, why do I even care?
jesus dude ok fine you don't like it. you apparently won't get anyone to change your mind so I really don't get the point of this thread
Posted by dr smartass phd
RIP 8/19
Member since Sep 2004
20387 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:25 am to
I know which episode of TOS is coming on, within 10 sec of the cold open. I thought TNG was sacrilege when it started. But in the end as I've gotten older, I don't really care, it's a TV show and JJ's new Trek, entertained the hell out of me and that's what counts.
Posted by Hoodoo Man
Sunshine Pumping most days.
Member since Oct 2011
31637 posts
Posted on 2/15/13 at 9:26 am to
He wants us to hate it.


Regardless, we all answered your question, OP.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 8Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram